- (1.) BY the Court. Heard the learned Counsel for the Defendant Appellant. The learned Counsel for the Caveator -applicant who has put in appearance at this stage, has also been heard.
(2.) THE only submission urged and pressed in support of this appeal by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the impugned order passed by the learned District Judge being violative of the mandatory provisions contained under Order XXXIX, Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code is not sustainable in law. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that considering the facts and circumstances as brought on record and the nature of the interim injunction sought for, it was incumbent upon the learned District Judge to record the reasons for its opinion that the object of granting the ex -parte ad interim injunction, which was ignored altogether.
(3.) WE have searched in vain for any reason in the impugned order, a perusal of which indicates that the learned District Judge ignoring the mandatory provisions of law has recorded only a conclusion without giving any reasons.;